The California Legislature has been busy processing hundreds of bills to meet the House of Origin deadline for first passage.
Bills can always be modified later, including under the unfortunate “gut and amend” process, which replaces the wording of a bill with something entirely new (even entirely new subject matter). But right now, legislators are quickly moving to clear bills.
Here’s our first take on some of the bills, beginning with a good one.
Senate Bill 58 is by state Sen. Scott Wiener, D-San Francisco. For those 21 and over, it would decriminalize some psychedelics, specifically “psilocybin, psilocyn, dimethyltryptamine (DMT), ibogaine, and mescaline.”
As the bill itself notes, prohibition has failed to deter drug use and has increased the hazards of ingesting possibly adulterated drugs, in particular with fentanyl, which can be deadly. Colorado and Oregon recently passed ballot measures with similar decriminalization effects. The bill passed on the Senate floor on May 24. We favor its passage in the Assembly.
As long as they aren’t harming anyone else, let adults make their own choices. The government doesn’t need to dictate personal choices.
Now, on to the not-so-good bills.
Senate Bill 252 is by Sen. Lena Gonzalez, D-Long Beach. It would prohibit the giant Public Employees’ Retirement System and the State Teachers’ Retirement System from renewing or making new investments “in a fossil fuel company.” This would have no effect on climate change because the stocks would just be picked up by other investors, but it could undermine the necessary funding of state pensions.
Both of these funds already are not fully funded, CalSTRS at just 74% and CalPERS at 81%.
A 2018 Wilshire report found CalPERS lost $3.6 billion after its 2001 divestment from tobacco funds. Pensions are guaranteed by taxpayers, so any similar loss could be picked up by them. The bill passed the Senate, 23-10, on May 25. But we recommend the Assembly turn it down.
Keep politics out of pension investments.
Senate Bill 2 is by Sen. Anthony Portantino, D-Glendale. The bill is in response to last year’s Bruen decision by the United States Supreme Court affirming a Second Amendment right to carry a concealed weapon in most circumstances. The new bill, according to the Senate Floor Analysis, would ban concealed carry in 26 new “specific places,” including all daycare and school grounds, college campuses, medical facilities, public parks and playgrounds, public transit, public demonstrations and gatherings, athletic and professional sporting facilities, places of worship, banks and any place where alcohol is sold.
SB 2 obviously violates Bruen. The specified places and institutions already have the option of banning concealed-carry weapons if they so choose and don’t need the state interfering in their policies. The bill passed the Senate, 29-9, on May 25. We recommend the Assembly reject it. If it becomes law, the federal courts almost certainly would overturn it. The state should focus on policies that will not only survive the courts but which are likely to actually reduce gun violence.
—The Editorial Board, Southern California News Group
